Making Out

[PhuturePriest]

Can "eating yo gurt" lead to out of control sexual urges?  :eek:

 

God forbid someone experience "venereal pleasure" of any kind.

 

I actually had a dream where I looked at this thread and abrideofchrist had been banned. I was confused, because she hadn't done anything ban-worthy. Unless Dust told her that she can never use the word "venereal" on the forum again, and she said "Never! If I can't say it again, you might as well ban me!"

Edited March 8, 2014 by FuturePriest387

[Selah]

I love Phatmass dreams. Once I had a dream that then Pope Benedict came to visit.

[southern california guy]

God forbid someone experience "venereal pleasure" of any kind.

I actually had a dream where I looked at this thread and abrideofchrist had been banned. I was confused, because she hadn't done anything ban-worthy. Unless Dust told her that she can never use the word "venereal" on the forum again, and she said "Never! If I can't say it again, you might as well ban me!"

If you don't do it then you won't know how good it feels -- and you will not be tempted.

Wait a second! Isn't "venereal" some sot of disease?!

[arfink]

Every time I see this thread get bumped I am reminded of the thousand-and-so miles between me and my lovvie and how we won't be making out until Easter. Thanks a lot guys. Just turn that knife for me. ;)

[PhuturePriest]

Every time I see this thread get bumped I am reminded of the thousand-and-so miles between me and my lovvie and how we won't be making out until Easter. Thanks a lot guys. Just turn that knife for me. ;)

 

"Lovie"?

 

You disgust me. :P

[chrysostom]

During the canonization proceedings for St. Dominic, an important factor was his virginity (according to Guy Bedouelle, O.P., St. Dominic: The Grace of the Word) - the kind of virginity that abrideofChrist speaks of.  It was seen as approaching martyrdom in the merit of self-denial.  So yes, most people are not virgins in that sense, both back then and now.

 

Of course, the definition of virginity meaningful to most today is abstinence from the fullness of the marital act, and of course the preservation of the female physical sign of virginity has always had its own kind of significance throughout the years.  I guess two (or two and a half) definitions are fighting for the space of one word and that gets confusing.

 

It is indeed much harder to be chaste nowadays.  My opinion is that if in previous generations, making out was indubitably seen as foreplay, it will continue to be, and as such should be limited to marriage.  Perhaps confusion has set in now that so many people do it without ending it in the marital act and thus don't classify it as foreplay per se. 

[PhuturePriest]

During the canonization proceedings for St. Dominic, an important factor was his virginity (according to Guy Bedouelle, O.P., St. Dominic: The Grace of the Word) - the kind of virginity that abrideofChrist speaks of.  It was seen as approaching martyrdom in the merit of self-denial.  So yes, most people are not virgins in that sense, both back then and now.

 

Of course, the definition of virginity meaningful to most today is abstinence from the fullness of the marital act, and of course the preservation of the female physical sign of virginity has always had its own kind of significance throughout the years.  I guess two (or two and a half) definitions are fighting for the space of one word and that gets confusing.

 

It is indeed much harder to be chaste nowadays.  My opinion is that if in previous generations, making out was indubitably seen as foreplay, it will continue to be, and as such should be limited to marriage.  Perhaps confusion has set in now that so many people do it without ending it in the marital act and thus don't classify it as foreplay per se. 

 

The "female physical sign of virginity" is ridiculous and stupid. It's not even a legitimate "sign" of virginity. Something that is commonly destroyed at young ages by riding a bike, exercising, and even medical examinations, has nothing to do with virginity.

 

Just thought I would rant about that. :P I've seen too many people put so much importance on the hymen, when it's really not that important whatsoever. I'm not saying you put importance on it, to be clear.

Edited March 19, 2014 by FuturePriest387

[Anastasia13]

During the canonization proceedings for St. Dominic, an important factor was his virginity (according to Guy Bedouelle, O.P., St. Dominic: The Grace of the Word) - the kind of virginity that abrideofChrist speaks of.  It was seen as approaching martyrdom in the merit of self-denial.  So yes, most people are not virgins in that sense, both back then and now.

 

Of course, the definition of virginity meaningful to most today is abstinence from the fullness of the marital act, and of course the preservation of the female physical sign of virginity has always had its own kind of significance throughout the years.  I guess two (or two and a half) definitions are fighting for the space of one word and that gets confusing.

 

It is indeed much harder to be chaste nowadays.  My opinion is that if in previous generations, making out was indubitably seen as foreplay, it will continue to be, and as such should be limited to marriage.  Perhaps confusion has set in now that so many people do it without ending it in the marital act and thus don't classify it as foreplay per se. 

 

French kissing and making out do not automatically lead to sexual intercourse. They can and can cause temptation. Limits, convictions, and great moderation along with when and where help prevent that.  Hugging can lead to more physical contact and things less than kissing can cause someone to be aroused-ask any teenager if they have ever been aroused. Being alone with someone can lead to activity that can lead to sex, yet I don't think it is a sin for a 30-something year old couple to be alone at some point before their wedding day. Since I am disinclined to say that we should only date people we are not attracted to lest we experience arousal or have the thought of sex ever cross our minds, I think it is most important to respect that we have limits of what we can handle so as to not fall into temptation and respect that the marital act belongs in the context of a marriage. Judging based on the existence of arousal, or the exact seconds of a kiss before it becomes sinful or whether contact is limited to just the lips or if tongues touch at all and how much seems a little arbitrary after a while.

 

Does the fact that something can cause arousal automatically make it sinful?

[havok579257]

During the canonization proceedings for St. Dominic, an important factor was his virginity (according to Guy Bedouelle, O.P., St. Dominic: The Grace of the Word) - the kind of virginity that abrideofChrist speaks of.  It was seen as approaching martyrdom in the merit of self-denial.  So yes, most people are not virgins in that sense, both back then and now.

 

Of course, the definition of virginity meaningful to most today is abstinence from the fullness of the marital act, and of course the preservation of the female physical sign of virginity has always had its own kind of significance throughout the years.  I guess two (or two and a half) definitions are fighting for the space of one word and that gets confusing.

 

It is indeed much harder to be chaste nowadays.  My opinion is that if in previous generations, making out was indubitably seen as foreplay, it will continue to be, and as such should be limited to marriage.  Perhaps confusion has set in now that so many people do it without ending it in the marital act and thus don't classify it as foreplay per se. 

 

 

your definition of making out being foreplay makes no sense.  cause even in the confines of a marriage, a couple could not make out unless it lead to the marital act.  to do otherwise would be tsrating something sexual but not finishing which if we stay on the legalistic mindset your going with, means the couple committed a mortal sin by engaing in sexual acts but not being open to life.   

[oremus1]

The "female physical sign of virginity" is ridiculous and stupid. It's not even a legitimate "sign" of virginity. Something that is commonly destroyed at young ages by riding a bike, exercising, and even medical examinations, has nothing to do with virginity.

 

Just thought I would rant about that. :P I've seen too many people put so much importance on the hymen, when it's really not that important whatsoever. I'm not saying you put importance on it, to be clear.

This is true. Without being too graphic for young eyes, it is not, as commonly believed, a blanket shape, but rather, a ring of flesh shaped like a doughnut to allow womens monthly fluids to come out. this aperature (according to Wikipedia) grows larger with age. Also, when the doctor inserts the speculum for medical examinations, such as compulsory smear tests, this will tear it. Also apparantly some women have flexible ones and can engage in relations without it ripping fully.  43% (again, wiki) of women do not bleed in first time intercourse

 

This is why, presumably, Aquinas in Summa (II-II 'on virginity') says that the 'organ of virginity' is accidental, and not indicative of virginity and is to be disregarded.

 

However my priest says that some religious orders require women to be virgins and do require a medical examination to prove it. i dont know if this is true, but Daughters of St Paul in Manila do something like this.

 

your definition of making out being foreplay makes no sense.  cause even in the confines of a marriage, a couple could not make out unless it lead to the marital act.  to do otherwise would be tsrating something sexual but not finishing which if we stay on the legalistic mindset your going with, means the couple committed a mortal sin by engaing in sexual acts but not being open to life.   

it is a weighty thing to disregard aquinas as irrelavent or legalistic
 

[Selah]

Why are men so obsessed with a woman's virginity?

 

I think men should be virgins.

 

All of them.

 

Even after sex.

 

You better still be a virgin.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

Why are men so obsessed with a woman's virginity?

 

I think men should be virgins.

 

All of them.

 

Even after sex.

 

You better still be a virgin.

 

What do you mean by men being obsessed about a woman's virginity? And how can you be a virgin after sex?

[Selah]

What do you mean by men being obsessed about a woman's virginity? And how can you be a virgin after sex?

 

A joke.

 

It was.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

ohhhhhh kaaaaaay, now i know. :)

[arfink]

However my priest says that some religious orders require women to be virgins and do require a medical examination to prove it. i dont know if this is true, but Daughters of St Paul in Manila do something like this.

 

My two cents: many women's religious orders do idiotic stuff that would never be tolerated in a million years by men, and if men did it to women it would be viewed as grossly sexist. I don't understand it.